Not checking tables...

[Potteraholic]

And rather than checking the table (sorry, PAH), I find it's easier just to look in the folder to see what's there.

The trouble with that is, re: the folders where threads were not categorized, folks will, and have reposted them in 2 different folders. So then when I look for where to place the √ on the tables, it gets confusing. Here's the code for one table, if anyone's interested. There are five tables, with the same amount of code, more or less. It gets tricky navigating through them, as I hope folks can appreciate.

Spoiler:

So if folks have an extra few minutes to spare looking at the relevant table, it would save me some unnecessary searching. Thanks. FYI, many of the polls were doubly archived [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. It would be great if they weren't doubly reposted, at least from my perspective. So if the folks concerned could work out some plan amongst themselves, that would be very helpful.

[Lady Arabella]

You are quite right - there are lots of topics un-categorized, and I should check the tables. (I will shortly go iron my hands.)

I was thinking of the folders like "Magical Places," where there wasn't any overlap. If I see that The Cave isn't in that folder, it seems pretty safe to post it. It also seemed possible that someone might have re-posted 4 or 5 threads before notifying you of an update, so checking the folder to see if something was already there seemed like a reasonable thing to do.

I really didn't mean to be unappreciative of all the hard work you have put into the tables, nor do I want to add to your workload!

[Mona]

Thanks for the kind words about the 'ulcer-inducing' Snape threads. Only two more to go!

Good work all of you! I see many new threads have been posted while I was taking a break.

Late, I know, but I've finally joined the reposting process. My first (experimental) reposted thread is Significance of the "Half Blood Prince" Title? in Potter-pourri Observations & Questions. No index yet. Advice and comments are welcome.

Yay, Julia! I went and had a look, and it looks very nice! Good job!

[Potteraholic]

It also seemed possible that someone might have re-posted 4 or 5 threads before notifying you of an update, so checking the folder to see if something was already there seemed like a reasonable thing to do.

Yes, I agree. That works in theory, but somehow, there happen to be two 'Killing Harry / Sparing Lily – (Condensed Thread)' in the same folder posted 5 days apart.

To avoid future duplications, I guess what I'm saying is, to use the tables as part of your planning process, before you even start reformatting things to repost. See if anyone archived the same thing you did, and correspond with them to see if they reposted it, and if not, decide who's going to post what.

Also, it would help me to have other sets of eyes looking at those tables to be on the lookout for duplicate threads that were archived. I have looked at those folders lots of times now, to find these duplicate threads, and make a note of them, using red text or green text. But I'm sure I've missed some, and some of those threads are long, I'm sure. Why should valuable time be spent posting any of them twice?

So if folks looked at the tables to check for any doubles that I missed, then made a note of them in a post here, I could annotate them as such in the tables. That would be another way to avoid duplicating any more threads in the future.

Elanor and LA, I started adding the √s in the tables last night re: your updated threads, but got really tired looking at all that text the computer screen, so decided to leave it for another time to avoid making a mistake.

[John Bumbledore]

To avoid future duplications, I guess what I'm saying is, to use the tables as part of your planning process, before you even start reformatting things to repost. See if anyone archived the same thing you did, and correspond with them to see if they reposted it, and if not, decide who's going to post what.

Also, it would help me to have other sets of eyes looking at those tables to be on the lookout for duplicate threads that were archived. I have looked at those folders lots of times now, to find these duplicate threads, and make a note of them, using red text or green text. But I'm sure I've missed some, and some of those threads are long, I'm sure. Why should valuable time be spent posting any of them twice?

So if folks looked at the tables to check for any doubles that I missed, then made a note of them in a post here, I could annotate them as such in the tables. That would be another way to avoid duplicating any more threads in the future[/color]

Now there's an engraved invitation if I ever saw one.

Also, it would help me to have other sets of eyes looking at those tables to be on the lookout for duplicate threads that were archived.

PAH, have I told you how I cheat on tables? I don't try to edit them here in the forum edit box. Instead I copy the table and paste into a new Word document (for temporary workspace). Word lets me change [/td][td] into [/td]^t[td] and [/tr] into [/tr]^l making the table code into a tab delimited table. Word can sort a tab delimited table by any column you wish much like Excel can sort tables...

Would you consider breaking each large table into separate tables for each section? I'll work up a sample of Table 1 in the practice thread because it is hard to explain how it would look.

[Potteraholic]

John, I noticed you posted something in the Practice thread a few hours ago, so had a quick look just now. Hmmm... those tables look just like the ones that I've been using. I even checked out the code to see what difference there was, if any. There's no noticeable change in them, to my eyes, at least. I thought there were going to be shorter tables and more of them in a post, separated by some line breaks or space. I guess I misunderstood. I think I'll stick to the tables that I'm using now, or just break them up into smaller chunks. Thanks for the idea anyway! I'll work up some shorter tables later in the week.

EDIT: Oh, I see one change, the threads are in ABC order by title, and not grouped together by archivist's name. Is that what that stuff about 'Excel tabulation sort a tab delimited thingy meant? I have no clue. (I had to look that up in your post and copy and paste it into here.)

[John Bumbledore]

I've reformatted and sorted parts of table 1 and table 4 over in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

What you want to look for:

• Table width as a percentage of the post area width. Look for

  Code:

  the "[table Width='[i]something[/i]%' ..."and the similar "[td Width='some%'][/td]"

• Yes, the "header" (first) row of each table is formed with "blank" table details/cells

  Code:

  (i.e. [td][/td]

  but they have Width attributes that determine their sized relative to the table width for the whole table.
  
• I also removed the "Align=Left" for all but the "Key to Initials" table. That places the "Index" link at the bottom of the post, after the last "Section Table". {I was guessing that was where you wanted it.}
  
• Using table and cell width specified as a percentage enables them to shrink and grow when the reader changes the width of their browser window.
  
• By editing in Word and using "

  Code:

  /tr]^p

  ", you can highlight a section to sort and use the table menu to sort the paragraphs. (use Alt-A, then S, then enter). That is how I alphabetized the sections by title.
  
• Word lets you triple click to highlight a full paragraph (ie. a row of the table) and they you can then click and drag the selected row to a better place in the section-sub-tables (like grouping similar thread names).
  
• I removed spaces and ^p (paragraph marks) between the end of one table and the start of the next "

  Code:

  [/table][Table

  " to join them up in appearance. Otherwise there is a one line gap between section tables. (I've viewed these tables with both IE and Chrome, they both display the tables similarly.) You can leave a ^p between the end of one table and the start of the next if you like.
  
• Word in landscape, with clear, small font and size (Calibri 8pt) showing all or most of the column between tabs. (see red arrows in image)
  [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
  
• Above image shows "tabular table" (alignment of lines for table appearance) and the highlighted selection of rows for possible moving by click-and-drag in word.

Does that help?

I see another use of the Tables as and Index for HPLF members searching for old threads. They can see the status of our process, and with a link [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] added for each section title pointed to the forum section were they can be found.

[Potteraholic]

I'm sorry to say, John, maybe it's that my brain is fried being that it's the last week of school after an especially busy June, but my reaction upon my first read of your post was, "This is way over my head. I'm going to stick to what I have now." Maybe it'll make more sense to me later this week, but this sort of computer knowledge is really beyond me.

I was really just asking if someone could look over the tables to find duplicate threads that had been archived, besides the ones I found. Your new suggestions are just beyond my capacity for understanding, I'm sorry to say.

This is what I think I can manage:

1. I also removed the "Align=Left" for all but the "Key to Initials" table. That places the Index link at the bottom of the last "Section Table" for the post.

2. With table and cell width specified as a percentage, they shrink and grow when the reader changes the width of their browser window.

---

---

This made me go :
- By editing in Word and using "/tr]^p", you can highlight a section to sort and use the table menu to sort the paragraphs. (use Alt-A, then S, then enter). I have a MacBook and no ALT key. What does Alt-A do?
- Word lets you triple click to highlight a full paragraph (ie. a row of the table) and they you can click and drag the row to a better place in the section-sub-tables. I have a touch keybad on MacBook so no triple clicking; I suppose I could just highlight a section the way I usually do.
- I removed spaces and ^p (paragraph marks) between the end of one table and the start of the next " What does that do to the table that's different from what I had?

Thanks for the ideas, John. Will have a look at them again, when my brain is less fried. And hopefully something will click.

---

---

Okay, I'm still trying to figure out what the exact improvements are from the original tables and the revised ones:

1. My index link will always be at the bottom of the table instead of at the side, at times.

2. With the table and cell width specified as a percentage, they shrink and grow when the reader changes the width of their browser window.

3. The Archivists' names chart is wider. Okay, but not sure how that's an improvement.

4. Then I have to manually (by highlighting text) move it so it's in ABC order? Shucks, I thought there was an Excel formula that did that. I don't think I'm gonna spend any more time on the tables than I have already done, to move text. ABC order is nice, but I'm not signing on to do that. The Five Words Archives await my attention, and I'd rather spend my time with them. Easier tables. EDIT: Oh, so Alt-A on PCs alphabetize? That's handy, but I have a Mac, and I dunno what the equivalent of the Alt-A function is on a Mac. So, if it's manual alphabetizing, I'm out.

But if the tables were in ABC order, duplicate threads would be next to each other, which would be a plus. But there's 3 other tables to format. I think I'll just change the index thing and the table/cell width %age. As for moving text, I'll let sleeping dogs lie.

[Potteraholic]

I see another use of the Tables as an Index for HPLF members searching for old threads. They can see the status of our process, and with a link [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] added for each section title pointed to the forum section were they can be found.

I don't really think anyone but the Archivists have looked at these tables, to be honest, and even then, well...

In any case, links to each folder are easy enough to add to the tables. John would you consider reformatting the other 3 tables and then posting them in the Practice thread? You understand the process way more than I do. Then I can just copy and paste them into the 'Tables' thread. Or maybe you can email the Word documents to me? I would make a big note that the new and improved tables were thanks to you, of course.

If not, I'll just use your cheat system... opening a Word document and using this stuff:[/td][td] into [/td]^t[td] and [/tr] into [/tr]^l and keep things in the non-ABc order they're in. Sleeping dogs and all that.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I knew I forgot something:

Would you consider breaking each large table into separate tables for each section? I'll work up a sample of Table 1 in the practice thread because it is hard to explain how it would look.

Ummm... I see the same large tables in the Practice thread, not 'separate tables for each section'. Are they coming down the pike?

[Madam Pince]

I don't really think anyone but the Archivists have looked at these tables, to be honest, and even then, well...

I look at them every once in awhile just for the sheer awe of it all... you guys are amazing! We're not worthy! We're not worthy!

[Potteraholic]

Thanks, Madam Pince! I'm sure the others will agree that a little apprecation will go a l-o-o-o-n-g way!

[Julia H.]

Julia's list of Reposted Threads
√ = updated on table

update #1, June 29, 2011
Significance of the "Half Blood Prince" Title? (Potter-pourri Observations & Questions) √

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone Ch 1-4 (Harry Potter Book Read Along) √
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone Ch 5-8 (Harry Potter Book Read Along) √
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone Ch 9-12 (Harry Potter Book Read Along) √
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's/Philosopher's Stone Ch 13-17 (Harry Potter Book Read Along) √

The four PS/SS Read Along threads above are now in one thread. Of course, the post numbers start again and again from one - but I did my best to "disambiguate" the numbering. The index will help, too, I think - eventually. (At the moment I'm just formatting and reposting. I will figure out how to make an index afterwards.)

As suggested by PAH, there will be a thread for each book, and the various read alongs will be grouped there. However, I think it may be worth making a separate thread for what we called "Series Read Along" (all seven books), since it is, in theory, still in progress (we were in Book 4), and I kind of hope that it will continue.

Is there anything else I have to do to officially "announce" the newly reposted threads?

---

update #2, July 10, 2011
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban 2007 (Harry Potter Book Read Along) √

---

update #3, July 17, 2011
Harry Potter Series Read Along (2005) √
(I renamed the thread as the OotP Read Along, since that's what it is in reality.)

---

[Potteraholic]

[ 6/25/2011 ]Hey! I see PAH was here and added the cool blue check marks.. (why aren't they your standard green?)

And be predictable? Besides, blue is my second favorite color.

Julia, I just added a few bits and bobs to your reposted threads update, like your name in the post title, update #1, and a line separator [*hr] (no*) for the next update.

So that you can access this update post again more quickly next time, look for the link in the header post. I've put the list of everyone's links to their update posts in a 'quote box' for easier visibility. *** continued reposting charms ***

I am not going to update the tables until Saturday. I am going to use some of John's ideas to make the tables easier to navigate, namely breaking down the longer sections into their own tables, and grouping smaller sections into a table. So the order of sections may or may not be slightly different from the current one. I am not alphabetizing the threads within a section since I don't know what the Mac version of the PC command Alt-A is to alphabetize things automatically. I do not want to spend time alphabetizing all those threads manually. It sounds time-consuming, and I don't want to consume any more time on this than I have to for something a few people may or may not look at.

So if folks want to make sure they don't duplicate the reposting of uncategorized, or even categorized threads, please have a look at various pertinent folders before starting the reposting process. Thanks!

[Mona]

All this about updating the tables is completely bamboozling to me and makes me thankful I chose very few threads to repost. I don't envy you your job, PAH! But someone has to do it and I'm thankful we have you!

Strengthening charms to all archivists!

[Potteraholic]

Thanks, Mona. But if I knew then what I know now...

On second thoughts, having looked over [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] yet again, I am none the wiser about what things mean, really. Some folks understand these sorts of technical things instinctively, some don't. I am in the latter camp. So I am not going to reformat the tables in any major way; I have other things I'd like to do with my time, namely get going with the Five Words story archives, my pet project.

Re: the tables, this is what I can do, since it simply involves copying and pasting what John has done in the Practice thread. I will make minor changes so that the:
1) red 'index' link always appears at the bottom of the table
2) the table width percentage thingy is fixed

I do not know how to do code for tables, never professed to know when I volunteered to organize the updating efforts, and it is not worth it to me to spend the time needed to figure out how to reformat the other 3 tables in Word documents similar to how tables 1 and 4 were reformatted in Word. This is not a skill I could use anywhere else, quite frankly.

If people look at the tables as they are now, with no ABC order and no separated sections, to help plan for what they repost... great! If they don't look at them, well I guess that'll have to be okay, too. Que sera, sera.

(Thanks Madam Pince, for checking the tables now and again. I hope you've been able to follow them okay.)

If anyone else would like to take over the job as 'Keeper/Updater/(and maybe, now, Reformatter) of the Tables', I am happy to pass over the keys. Just say the word. Until then, it'll be the old, mostly unchanged, longer, unalphabetized tables I update, I'm afraid.

[John Bumbledore]

I do not know how to do code for tables, never professed to know when I volunteered to organize the updating efforts, and it is not worth it to me to spend the time needed to figure out how to reformat the other 3 tables in Word documents similar to how tables 1 and 4 were reformatted in Word.

I can understand that. I can sort the threads within each sections and post them for you in the practice thread, PAH. I am just pressed for time at the moment.

(why I have it easier) Way back in 1995 I had training on most of the MS Office applications. I use Word and Excel every day (heavy on the Excel formulas, macros, and sorting). I also forget that not all the world has been subjugated by Windows. That Alt-A thing is just a windows short-cut, all it does is to open the Table menu (and that is where Microsoft programmers thought was the best location for the sorting tool.) It isn't a hard as I make it sound, really.

One change I thought might help shorten the tables a bit was to use only one row for a thread and indicate duplicates by listing multiple archivist initials in their column.

Another Grand idea I had was to load all the threads into a database and provide statistical information like number of posts per member (we see that here on this forum under our avatar image) or most words in a single post or highest words per post average.

Then I considered if I would like to receive a virtual Verbosity award... maybe not so much.

I'll get to posting sorted tables with some of the new format in the practice thread in a few days. The sad part is having to copy a post into word just to add spacing to make the rows and columns visible for easier editing. Using the | Edit > | Replace | makes it quicker but it is still a pain. I don't know why Forumotion strips out spaces and line breaks from in between the table codes.

The week of month-end is a pressure cooker for me.

[Potteraholic]

Okay, John, just wanted to make sure I understood your message in the previous post...

In a nutshell, after this busy week at you workplace is over, you're volunteering to be the 'Keeper/Updater/Reformatter of the Tables?

I'll finish updating Elanor and Lady A's updates by Saturday morning, so everything will be up-to-date for you when you take over.

[Elanor]

Bonjour to all!

I was too tired to update my list of reposted threads yesterday evening but I will do it by this weekend. Actually I'm just 3 threads short of having reposted everything I copied (not counting the vote threads and it seems there were many duplicates of these). I did check the tables very carefully and I have a doubt concerning one of the remaining threads I have to repost.

In my list, I have saved it as "The Hidden Meaning in Hair" but I saw that LA has saved one named "The Meaning/Importance of Hair". They were not written in red but I suspect they are one and the same. The one I have was started by schoff on September 13, 2003 and it is 196 post long. Is yours the same one LA? I'll repost it if you wish since I have so few threads left but first wanted to check with you first if it was the same.

[Lady Arabella]

Hi Elanor - I'm sure it's the same thread - I remember at the time I saved it, I guessed at the name. If you would like to re-post, go right ahead. (I'm always happy to palm work off on someone else! )

[Potteraholic]

John, in my haste, I think I might've misunderstood your message from yesterday. You're just saying you're going to reformat the other tables after this week is done, right? You're not saying you're going to update what's been reposted, like I've been doing? If that's the case, I'm fine with that. Anything to avoid figuring out how to reformat the tables in a Word doc.

And if you could send me an email of exactly what the Word find and replace cheats are, in case I copied the stuff from your earlier post incorrectly before sending it to myself. Thanks!

Great job, Elanor! I'm not looking at the tables 'til Saturday morning at the earliest anyway... still have to finish packing up my room, finish some school paperwork, and attend the wake of a staff member's father in the next two days. I'll update LA's and Julia's threads, too, as well as mine.

LA, I'm almost done reposting the House-Elves thread you sent me I (the last one of the 12). I'm happy to do more, if you'd like to 'palm off' more work. When I first posted the standard intro. paragraph about the closing of World Crossing in those threads, I forgot to say that you'd copied and saved the threads, while I just reformatted and reposted them. But that's all fixed now!

I'll need a break every now and again from putting the Five Words Archive together — which is a different sort or reposting; I'm still working out the organization of it with 13 volumes/120+ stories/stats/post-story comments. I don't want it to take up lots of threads, so it will need to have a master index in one thread's header post... and I still need to format those docs... but I digress. Reposting threads like the ones in the 'Magical Creatures and Plants' is more straightforward, with a lot of Finding/Replacing during the formatting, which is easy enough to do while I'm watching TV or lounging around in various backyards this summer. So send 'em on over, if you want. I'm game! Maybe we can hit 50% done by the end of July!

[Lady Arabella]

PAH, I could send you files from the Magical Items, Spells and Potions folder. Some of the threads are short, some of them quite long (Horcruxes, for example), but most of it should be like the Magical Creatures files.

And I don't need to have mentioned in the introductory thread that I copied and saved the originals - don't even worry about it.

Also I have a file for Hermione Granger, with 229 posts from Aug. 29, 2003 to Nov. 9, 2003. I think it was in the Archived Condensed threads folder on WX, rather than in the Hogwarts Students folder. Once it is formatted, could it be merged into the beginning of the existing re-posted thread? Or will it need to stand alone? Does anyone want that file as well?

And since we don't have a thread for Crazy Theories We Should Have Considered But It's Too Late Now, I will post here the stunning realization of a theory that was right under our noses the whole time. It's on par with Dumbledore is the Giant Squid, Lupin is Really James, or Irma Pince is Eileen Prince. and that is Arabella Figg is really Argus Filch!!

Think about it: they have the same initials, in fact the first two letters of each name is the same (Ar Fi). They are both Squibs. They both like cats. The name "Argus" means watchful one, or guardian, and in OotP, Arabella Figg was appointed to watch over Harry. Just as Mrs. Norris seems to notify Filch when the students are causing trouble, isn't there one section where Harry thinks Mrs. Figg's cats are letting her know what he's doing? I'm sure I could come up with many more similarities. (I think I've been re-posting two many theories, and my brain is addled.) But as brilliant as Forum members are, in this case, we really missed the boat!

[Mona]

Actually I'm just 3 threads short of having reposted everything I copied (not counting the vote threads and it seems there were many duplicates of these).

Well done, Audrey! And Happy Holidays!

It's on par with Dumbledore is the Giant Squid, Lupin is Really James, or Irma Pince is Eileen Prince. and that is Arabella Figg is really Argus Filch!!

Think about it: they have the same initials, in fact the first two letters of each name is the same (Ar Fi). They are both Squibs. They both like cats. The name "Argus" means watchful one, or guardian, and in OotP, Arabella Figg was appointed to watch over Harry. Just as Mrs. Norris seems to notify Filch when the students are causing trouble, isn't there one section where Harry thinks Mrs. Figg's cats are letting her know what he's doing? I'm sure I could come up with many more similarities. (I think I've been re-posting two many theories, and my brain is addled.) But as brilliant as Forum members are, in this case, we really missed the boat!

Definitely on par with the other theories, LOL!

LA, you can send me the Hermione file, and I'll format it and repost it at the end of the existing Hermione Granger thread.

[John Bumbledore]

Mona, On WX there were two Hermione threads. Lady A. saved the shorter, earlier thread (by dates) so I don't think putting them at the end of your thread will quite work... unless you call it a "Time turner event." LOL

I have three posts in [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] that are dated 19 April and would merge into the beginning of your Hermione thread. But to get all 229 of LA's Hermione thread @ 50 per reply will require 5 posts dated before your 5 May starting post of your Hermione thread. Oh, I think I may have another post that could be merged into the beginning... let me check this thread.

Yes, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is dated 7 April and was used for part 2 of the unsaved WX thread list. It isn't needed now and doesn't have any conversation that would be missed.

Gee, this is kind of like a puzzle. "Quick, can we find a 5th blank placeholder or "filler" reply dated earlier than (Thu May 05, 2011 10:59 am?)"

So, I guess back on WX the first HG thead (that LA saved) didn't get many replies and was closed so the second thread got stared and Kip just archived the earlier thread?

Maybe we need Kip or Denise P. to write a little explanation post (sticky / announcement) that explains WX limits that caused some threads to be separated into volumes (some much shorter than their sequels.)

[Mona]

Bother!

Why don't I just post it at the end of the existing Hermione thread? I'll post an explanatory note saying it was already archived on WX, and give it a suitable title mentioning the dates of the posts, and have a link to it in the opening post. It can have its own index in its own opening post, something like what I'm doing for the Snape threads.

What does everyone else think?

(some much shorter than their sequels.)

Yes, the first Snape thread has only six hundred and something posts. Rather puzzling.

[Potteraholic]

Hmmm... no mention in your latest post, John, about the two posts [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I wrote earlier. I always try to reply to things people post on here, whether addressed to me personally, or to the general 'anyone'. Just sayin'...

Well, in any case, as it's Saturday morning here in New York City, and school is finished and the summer holidays have started, it's time to stick to my word and update the tables as they look now, with the info. folks have posted up till now. I'll finish posting the 'House-elves' thread first, tho'.

Elanor... WOO HOO! What a great way to start your holidays! Enjoy!

LA, Magical Items, Spells and Potions sounds great! Send away! And great catch with Argus Filch and Arabella Figg. Why not start a new non-archived thread about it here in our new home? I'm sure people would love having something new to discuss. And we really do need some new threads on here, with all these Archived ones... it'll breathe more new life here, methinks.

And I don't need to have mentioned in the introductory thread that I copied and saved the originals - don't even worry about it.

Too late! (I like to give credit where credit is due.)

Hope you guys figure out the Hermione thread! Mona, that sounds like a good idea to me, nice and simple. Maybe you could include your explanatory note re: the presence of different Hermione threads, in a 'quote box' at the bottom, just to make it stand out since that 'Hermione' thread's header post is quite long?

Speaking of indexes/indices, I looked at the Snape thread just now and was wondering... for your index for all 8 volumes (OMG! ... you should get 1,000 house points for sticking with that thread), maybe you could include the dates in the list, so that someone who remembers some specific discussion that happened in 2006, for example, or wanted to read what happened when HBP came out in 2005, could tell right away which link to click? Also, when you insert the Snape thread's INDEX link into all 450+ posts, would you consider adding the Vol. # in each individual post's title, just to make it clear which 'posts 1 to 50' someone is looking at? (I also saw some of your signature line - Alas, earwax! - in some of your posts.)

Off to have some breakfast, then do some reposting and updating.

[Sponsored content]